Litigation Knowledge Management Theory

It is my impression that most lawyers and law firms use some form of searchable document system (e.g. iManage) for their work product, and then think that they have "checked the box" for knowledge management. Not even close.

I'm developing the Master Litigation Checklist at this blog both to demonstrate the potential for knowledge management systems in litigation and as my own personal litigation knowledge management system. As I see it, the key elements of an effective litigation knowledge management system (and any knowledge management system) are:
-
The Checklist
-
For every task, there is a short list of critical things that must be done. That's what the checklist is for--it should guide you at the outset of a task, and it should be one of the final checks before filing a motion, sending a letter, or attending a hearing. I'm working to develop simple checklists for each of the many tasks that may be required in litigation. It's precisely because litigation has so many different tasks, many of which are performed relatively infrequently, that a checklist is so important. You can easily remember the steps to getting dressed because you do it every day, but when you only perform a task once a year (or less), it is easy to forget something critical if you're relying on your memory from the last time you did it.
-
Index of Best Practices
-
The best practice index is the complement to the checklist--these are not things that must be done every time a task is undertaken, but rather a list of ideas, considerations, strategies, etc. that should be considered every time. There are so many best practices that it's frankly impossible to keep them all in mind at all time. Instead, a key function of any litigation knowledge management system is to collect and index them and make sure that the appropriate best practices are readily available for the current task. By indexing best practices along side the checklist for a comprehensive list of legal tasks, the needed thoughts and advice will be readily available. Of course, it's not enough to have a good system for best practice indexing--you also need to have a sufficient list of best practices. More on that in the "Iterative Improvement" requirement, below. Ultimately, an attorney's skill and success is largely a function of the ability to draw on a large and readily applicable list of best practices.
-
Fusion Methodology
-
Checklists and lists of best practices are not enough--a good knowledge management system should also include an overarching system for integrating these components into the actual practice of law. I've worked to do that in my Master Litigation Checklist by including checklists, a litigation plan, and best practices for the creation of an "Initial and Iterative Strategic Plan." At once a master to-do list, a process flow diagram, a game plan, and a case calendar, the strategic plan is the document that fuses together the checklists and lists of best practices into a coherent litigation system.
-
Iterative Improvement
-
Finally, there is the need for iterative improvement. No system is perfect, and I launched my litigation knowledge management system at an intentionally incomplete stage, because a core function of such a system is to complete itself and then continually improve. This is done by making iterative action part of the system itself--that is, continually review how the former task or case went, changes in the law, developments in the field, etc., and then incorporate that into both checklists and best practices. An effective knowledge management system should place great importance on this kind of iterative improvement. In military strategy, this is known as the OODA-loop (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act), and it's commonly understood that if you can "get inside your opponent's OODA-loop," or innovate and adapt to the changing landscape more quickly, then you'll eventually prevail. In litigation, this means regularly searching publications, blogs, asking fellow attorneys, etc. for potential checklist improvements and additional best practices, as well as conducting an "after action review" of each task and case with an eye toward integrated lessons learned into the litigation knowledge management system. Even the overall structure of that system and the mechanism for iterative improvement are fair game for review.
-
That's a quick outline of my litigation knowledge management system--you can see the actual product here at my Master Litigation Checklist. What system do you use, and is it working?

This post is part of my Colorado litigation checklist approach to litigation knowledge management and litigation strategy.